[Dr Theta]

One thing I did not like about this most recent update is some of the amendments to the 3" incursion rule. While it outwardly appears to alleviate a lot of the problems of putting a match in the hands of the refs I fear that it has also potentially removed a rule that should have been an important part of teams design decisions. I can understand how this change is intended to remove cases such as team 111's misfortunes in which case the incursion is resultant of an truly 'incidental' occurrence and not indicative of a design flaw. But when teams are having the ball beneath their robot 2 or more times a match consistently there is a problem. Occasional occurrences like 111's are fine but consistent and repeated problems with this rule with numerous incursions without extenuating circumstances demonstrate a design flaw that does not truly fit in with the way this game was intended to be played.

So where do the refs draw the line as to what is truly incidental and caused by circumstance, and what constitutes a penalty where the incursion was not "incidental"? I think it is still a judgement call and one that will have to be made by the refs. I think it is up to the refs to define "incidental" in this case and they need to stick with that decision once it's been made. It is in their hands for this wording of the rule as much as it was for the original. It is their definition that decides whether there are zero penalties for "non-incidental" incursions or many. I would rather see this rule enforced and have a few casualties than see it made ineffectual by having no calls, as this was supposed to be a major part of the design process that many overlooked, but so long as the judgement is consistent throughout the regional I feel they are doing their job.

Just my $.02